rayeve Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Hi, My wife's Legacy needs new brake pads (at least in the front). Some dealers I've run into claim (not surprisingly) that one needs to replace the brakes at all four corners at one time. However, the rear don't show a lot of rear on the pads when I inspect them. Anyone know if there really IS a good reason to replace the rears at the same time as the fronts? (The car has about 80,000 on it). Thanks!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f1anatic Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 here's a good reason: the rear ones are about half as thick (when new) as the fronts. The brake bias is to the front. Most people wear out fronts and rears at the same rate. However, I wear my REAR brake pads faster than my fronts because I tread lightly on the brake pedal. 80,000 miles on a set of pads is way too long. Do them all at once. You can also take the wheels off and inspect the pads thru the caliper viewing window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZP Installs Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 You only need to replace them if they are worn down. Generally on Subies driven here in the NY/NJ area we have seen front pads last from 40-60k and rears last about 50-80k depending on the driver. -mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KartRacerBoy Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 If you don't replace the rears, assuming you have stock pads, stay with stock replacement front pads so you have similar coefficient of friction for front and rear pads. Otherwise you might change the brake bias slightly, for good or ill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDW25gt Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Put Hawk HPS all the way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.